Suggestions, Feedback & Bug Reports (OOC) > Module Feedback and Suggestions
Shrouded Dance at Performance 5 is overpowered
APorg:
So I'll start with the pre-amble that of course I'm grateful for the content produced by the Devs and the effort put it, but I'm also frustrated that we're not being listened to.
I'm sorry if that sounds combative, but the point has been made from day one that the feat was announced and been ignored; and now I'm hearing talk from some players who are basically saying, "Well, the only way this will be fixed is if we abuse the hell out of it, so that's what we're going to do". If players have to resort to this sort of attitude, it means someone isn't listening.
The book feat on which this is based is 12 Hide and 5 Performance for 20% concealment (if you pass a free Hide roll). This is nice, but not really that strong: it's basically just going to give you a few more Hitpoints, and is essentially negated by Blindfight (rerolling 20% concealment equates to a measly 4% concealment).
The PotM version is one free HIPS per day. At high levels, the DC 30 roll will be automatically succeeded. One free HIPS per day is basically an auto-ambush or auto-disengage if the other side don't bring an equal-level detector. This requires zero thought or strategy. This doesn't make high-level detectors merely highly useful. They make them utterly mandatory for dealing with certain classes in almost all situations. This is a virtual auto-win that is far too easy to acquire.
Your high level Rogue is dancing around the Outskirts being an irresponsible idiot when the Garda come along and catch him out in the open? Hey, they're low levels without Spot gear, who cares! Press one button and you've escaped! Don't even need to pop potions or use tactics like corner-stealthing anymore!
Your high level stealth Monk is finally caught in the open by the bounty hunters who've been chasing him for hours? Oh, you don't need to outrun all of them, just their detector. One button click and you're safe.
It's especially bad because the three classes who benefit the most from this (Rogues, Bards, and Monks on PotM have both Hide and Perform) are actually really strong in PvP. It's true that Rogues and Monks lag a bit behind in PvE at the earlier levels, but they are strong in PvP and always have been. They don't need a PvP boost, but Shrouded Dance is a massive PvP boost.
This balance point is questionable all around and you will see people abusing this feat. Some of them are going to abuse the feat precisely to prove the point.
(And before the usual "Monks are weak" crowd chime in that I'm not allowed to have an opinion on monks because I've never played a high level one -- today, my level 20 paladin lost in a zero-buff start tournament duel to a level 19 monk, in a context that denied the monk the advantage of his speed. I think I'm allowed to have an opinion now. The Monk can match or beat my Paladin in a zero-buff start duel, can out-run him, out-stealth him, and do pretty well even when both sides are fully buffed. It's a fact: high level monks are one of the strongest PVP classes, and will remain so as long as Hector's Essences and Hearts of the Beast drop in the loot tables.)
MAB77:
Is it truly disappointing to see that players believe they are not headed, if we give that impression then I apologize because I assure you nothing could be further away from truth. Especially in this very case were every arguments for or against Shrouded Dance have been careful weighted in and debated at length before we decided to include it.
Now... and that is important, do note that I am not telling you here that Shrouded Dance does not need to be revised. Like any newly added features it is good to assess the actual result of using that feat vs what was intended, and make adjustments as needed. But we have to look at the global picture here. You make a strong case of the feat's strength in PvP situations, but those situations are the exception not the norm.
Are they so prevalent that it is disruptive to the server? If yes, what would you recommend to balance the feat. Could it be simply a question of adding a longer timer in between uses?
Also, and I have yet to see reports about that, how does the feat perfom in the much more common PvE situations?
APorg:
To cover your points in reverse order:
In PvE, Shrouded Dance is going to be very useful, but disengagement from PvE was never really that hard. Most PCs can run away from NPC enemies by chugging an Invisibility potion. Shrouded Dance isn't that overpowered in PvE because NPCs largely exist to be beaten and the vast majority of them are lousy detectors anyway.
Will it be disruptive in PvP? In the sense of being a disruptive innovation, it is already seriously redefining how people look at stealth strategies and balance. Before, stealthers had to take precautions and use strategy to disengage; or at least use potions. There was an element of a counter game. The Rogue uses Darkness to try and engage stealth? Well, that can be countered by Ultravision or True Seeing. Invisibility? Ditto, can be countered by potions. Corner-stealthing?That requires practice and an element of player skill. The point is, if one side didn't play well, they usually lost.
Shrouded Dance gives the Rogue the option to click a button to "win" if the other side doesn't have a detector, and it does so for an effective cost of 5 Performance.
The true low cost is part of the issue: people taking Shrouded Dance can ignore the Hide Pre-Requisite, because the PotM version is an upgrade of Stealth, not a separate effect. People who take Shrouded Dance don't think "I want to get Shrouded Dance but it will cost me 12 Hide and 5 Performance"; no, they think "I have 12 Hide already because I'm a Stealther; now if I spent just 5 more into Perform, I have one HIPS per day".
The other issue is that it the DC 30 check doesn't scale well with level at all. At level 9, this check is tough to pull off and makes the feat something of a Hail Mary. At level 20, with 23 Skill ranks and a DEX score of at least 18, most stealthers will already be just a meager +1 or +2 away from this being an automatic success (and therefore an automatic win against non-detectors).
So I would make two suggestion to balance this feat:
- The first is to raise the pre-requisites. Maybe bump the Performance requirement to 12 or 10 points. That would least give this powerful feat a serious investment cost.
- Make the check for it to activate based on a skill or ability other than Hide. Stealthers are going to max out Hide anyway, so a Hide requisite is effectively an open gate, and a Hide Skill check becomes an automatic success. Some stealthers can hit Hide skill checks of 90 or 100 at high level on this server; a DC 30 Hide check is merely a penalty on lower level characters.
I would therefore suggest making it a pure DEX check with a reasonable DC. It is much harder to max out your DEX score than it is to max out Hide, so at least with a reasonable DEX DC check, there would always be a risk of failure. Most DEX PCs will probably be sitting around on a +5 or +6 unbuffed, going up to maybe +10 or more when fully buffed.
IMO the DC should also be proportional to how much Performance the Feat costs -- if you're going to keep the low, low cost of Performance 5, the DC ought to be around ~18 . If you're going to boost the Performance prerequisite up to something like Performance 10 or 12, a DC check of ~16 is fairer.
That would at least mean that this feat always has has a reasonable chance of failure and success.
ladylena:
I don't have the feat but... Is it set to work once per rest or one time in 24 game hours? Seems to me the latter would be a better options as it makes it something more like a 'holy cow i have to get outta here now' thing.
APorg:
--- Quote from: ladylena on June 23, 2018, 02:24:37 PM ---I don't have the feat but... Is it set to work once per rest or one time in 24 game hours? Seems to me the latter would be a better options as it makes it something more like a 'holy cow i have to get outta here now' thing.
--- End quote ---
Currently, once per day means once per rest, yeah.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version